Welcome to our forums!
This online gardening community is different, political, and organic. I decided to start these forums so gardeners would have a free place to discuss heirloom gardening, gene-altered food, seed saving, natural politics and products. We are dedicated to saving our food and horticultural heritage, and hope you enjoy this forum for the free-thinking gardener!
Wishing you great gardening,

You are the one making it an issue. You said in another thread that abortion was no an issue to liberals and yet they spend a lot of time and money promoting it.

Really? You going to support any one of those claims?

So, a quick review:

The NASA letter has 49 signatures. No one from the denier camp has come forward with proof that any of them have any specific, credentialed documentation that those signers about climate.

The letter makes claims about climate science in opposition to the well established, well researched, well documented science with no evidence.

Yet this letter quickly bounced around the denielosphere as 'proof' .......

Then, when evidence is brought forward showing that those with well documented expertise and publishing history in the field have done the work and are in some 98% agreement, it suddenly becomes a 'non-issue'.

Got it. Yet another failed attempt by the denialosphere to create some doubt where virtually none exists.

The NASA letter has 49 signatures. No one from the denier camp has come forward with proof that any of them have any specific, credentialed documentation that those signers about climate.

The letter makes claims about climate science in opposition to the well established, well researched, well documented science with no evidence.

Yet this letter quickly bounced around the denielosphere as 'proof' .......

Then, when evidence is brought forward showing that those with well documented expertise and publishing history in the field have done the work and are in some 98% agreement, it suddenly becomes a 'non-issue'.

Got it. Yet another failed attempt by the denialosphere to create some doubt where virtually none exists.

And I can say exactly the same thing about you 1372 experts. None of which you have credentialed. You view from the alarmosphere is just as questionable as my view.

"Astronaut and Propulsion" and a myriad of other job titles that have nothing to do with research or work in the fields related to the study of climate science.

My second list is the AUTHORS of research papers whose findings are accepted by the 98% of the scientists with demonstrated expertise in those fields.

Again, your letter, the letter you are continuing to attempt to defend in spite of previously claiming it was a "non-issue", has far more in common with the Oregon Petition Project and the recent letter to the Wall Street Journal.

My second list is the AUTHORS of research papers whose findings are accepted by the 98% of the scientists with demonstrated expertise in those fields.

So your paper includes only folks with direct financial ties to the topic, and purposely doesnt include anyone who can read and understand the claims. Vast swaths of whom do not agree, despite the repetition by media... interesting... the 98 percent figure is hilarious. Anyone who believes it imo knows very little on the topic.

If you say so roberte... the science discredited itself when it had to ignore entire fields of expertise, downplay others, inflate others, cherry pick others... I cited aspects of all of this. You labelled it all outlier. It isnt scientific to only include data that fits your favorite theory... It should be clear who the real climate denialists are...

If you say so roberte... the science discredited itself when it had to ignore entire fields of expertise, downplay others, inflate others, cherry pick others... I cited aspects of all of this. You labelled it all outlier. It isnt scientific to only include data that fits your favorite theory... It should be clear who the real climate denialists are...

When we see what you consider substantive evidence......

"ignore entire fields of expertise"

", downplay others,"

" inflate others,"

" cherry pick others."

instead of your claims to have done so.

(just an fyi; some places you claim I ignore your sources, other places you claim I argue they are outlier data. Which is it?; do I ignore or prove the invalidity of your claims' resources?)

In actual reality, I did all that. you played your weird mind games, and 50 posts later, i guess you hope people believe you that all I did was claim it.... Your games are to tedious for me, Im not going to post the same things 100 times.

Quote:

(just an fyi; some places you claim I ignore your sources, other places you claim I argue they are outlier data. Which is it?; do I ignore or prove the invalidity of your claims' resources?)

Both and other related nonsense. You seriously do not realize this??? You dont remember having done it? i find that hard to believe.